February 16, 2006
On one side is former Clinton insider turned thorn in the Clinton's side, Dick Morris. Morris recommends the Republican's continue to point out the New York Senator from Alabama's tendency to anger.
It's a wonderful strategy since it takes away from her the capacity to campaign. Hillary is incapable of being anything other than bland or shrill. By making shrill politically expensive, and spreading the notion that she is too angry, they make it hard for her to make political points without hurting herself more than she is hurting her adversary. It is like criticizing Nixon for being too negative. Each new negative he threw hurt him more than the adversary.On the other side is Amity Shlaes who makes a very strong case for going after Clinton on her record in the Senate.
As E.J. McMahon, an economist at the Manhattan Institute, points out, the tax cuts did turn out to put "people first.'' Lower earning households saw great savings: a single parent of two children under age 17 saw an effective 84 percent cut in tax liability. In 2005, McMahon estimates, New Yorkers got to keep $14.6 billion in earnings that they would have had to pay in taxes without the changes in the federal law.
What's more, the Bush tax cuts were followed by both market and economic comebacks, just as Treasury Secretary Robert Rubin's capital-gains rate cut was followed by the boom of the late 1990s. Federal tax rate cuts did a lot to offset state and local tax increases. Using something called the State Tax Analysis Modeling Program, a software program that tries out different tax scenarios, McMahon estimates that without the federal cuts New York City would have lost jobs. Instead employment grew.
McMahon figures that for the six-year period of Clinton's first term New Yorkers will have kept $60 billion that they would have otherwise paid in taxes. Lots of people in New York don't get a Wall Street bonus. This tax cut was their bonus. Deprive them of it, and you limit the bonuses to Wall Street. You favor the rich in exactly the way that Clinton opposes.I think the Republican's could actually do well with both by adapting a strategy of Bush the Elder. A strategy that doesn't involve lip reading of course.
It is the strategy of Operation Desert Storm. For weeks before ground troops joined in the war to oust Hussein from his conquest of Kuwait we bombed the hell out of them. Day after day. Night after Night. Sortie after Sortie. By the time the ground troops moved in, it was a mop up operation.
Here's how it works in the campaign against Hillary. First from now until the start of the 08 general election campaign keep making note of her temper. Not in big speeches and public denunciations, but in small subtle ways. And every time during the primaries that she shifts into Shrillary mode, people will think about how they have heard of her temper. This will, as Morris predicts force her to shut down half of her normal mode of operating.
Once the general election starts (assuming she gets the nomination) stop pointing out her temper, but hit her hard on her record. She will be so wary of showing any fire that she will be virtually unable to offer even a modestly spirited defense. Until it gets to a point where she just can't take it anymore and has public meltdown that scares away even the New York Times
Soften the target, then take it out.
Posted by: Stephen Macklin at 03:21 PM | Comments (1) | Add Comment
Posted by: oliver at February 19, 2006 05:20 PM (U2b7U)
Powered by Minx 1.1.4-pink.









